Showing posts with label Consumers. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Consumers. Show all posts

27.2.15

Why trucking companies "stipulate to liability" in injury crashes



In Wisconsin, the trucking company biggies are:
  • ABF Freight System
  • American Freightways
  • C.H. Robinson Worldwide
  • Con-Way Transportation
  • FedEx Freight
  • Fox Transportation
  • J.B. Hunt Transport Services
  • Landstar System
  • Mayflower
  • Ryder
  • Saia Motor Freight
  • Scheider National
  • Swift Transportation
  • UPS Freight
  • Werner Enterprises
  • YRC Worldwide
According to a defense lawyer, the goal of stipulating to liability is "to exclude some prejudicial facts and to soften the jury's desire to punish."  You see, juries want to protect public safety.  They know bad conduct rewarded is repeated.  They also realize that crash victims are simply members of their community.

Jurors who hear how a trucking company chose to hire unqualified drivers or to give little or no training or supervision get concerned.  They see there has been a failure at the trucking company.  They see the trucking company is not protecting us from bad truck drivers.  Thus, companies want to avoid genuine accountability for the consequences of their choices and to hide those choices from a jury by "stipulating to liability."

For example, say prior to a crash a truck driver did something bad and the company chose to ignore it.  No trucking company wants a jury to know that.  So, the company concedes its driver's fault in causing a crash to avoid having the bad facts put in evidence.  Before trial, company lawyers argue to the judge that evidence of the bad facts is no longer admissible and unfortunately sometimes they succeed in hiding the facts.  The company then comes to trial begging for mercy while, at the same time, attacking the crash victim and blaming everything but the crash for the victim's damages.  The hope is to avoid a showing at trial that the crash was foreseeable and the company failed to protect the public.

Though this strategy may work to a certain extent, I believe in the uncompromising integrity of Wisconsin's jury system.  I am thankful that more often than not, our jurors decide theses cases the right way.

18.2.13

Bad Drivers Shouldn’t Profit Off of Good Drivers’ Health Insurance

Frank Pasternak

By Frank Pasternak

Imagine a law that will only benefit those people who do not have any health insurance and wrongdoers.

Well on February 13, Sen. Paul Farrow (who represents an area of Waukesha County that includes Pewaukee, Delafield, Hartland and Waukesha) and Sen. Glenn Grothman (who represents an area near West Bend and parts of northern Ozaukee County, including Port Washington and Cedarburg) did more than just imagine it; they introduced it. It’s Senate Bill 22, a law that would eliminate a long-standing rule of law in Wisconsin called the “collateral source rule.”

Basically, the rule says that benefits an injured person receives from sources that have nothing to do with the wrongdoer or “bad guy” causing the injury may not be used to reduce the bad guy's liability to the injured person. In other words, bad guys don’t get credit for benefits the injured person received just because the injured person was insured. This has been the law of Wisconsin for about 100 years.

The simple truth behind the rule is clear: wrongdoers should not benefit from the fact that the person they wronged was responsible enough to get insured. Unfortunately, however, as with many things, politics seems to have gotten in the way. Somehow, liability insurance companies like American Family, West Bend and others have convinced law makers, like Farrow and Grothman, that the bad guys should benefit from the fact that the injured person was responsible.

The law Farrow and Grothman have introduced will basically harm senior citizens, people who get insurance through their employer, and those on Medicaid. Ironically, the people who benefit from this law are those who do not have any health insurance and wrongdoers.

Let me explain: Say there’s a car accident where the wrongdoer ran a red light and caused four different people to incur $100,000.00 in medical bills each. All four suffered the same injuries and needed the same medical treatment. However, Victim #1 had no insurance, Victim #2 had Anthem BCBS through his employer, Victim #3 is a senior citizen on Medicare, and Victim #4 is a poor person on Medicaid.

Farrow and Grothman’s proposed law will allow into evidence the fact that Victim #2’s Anthem BCBS paid 80% of the bills due to contractual write-offs, the fact that Victim #3’s Medicare paid 60% of the bills, and Victim #4’s Medicaid paid 40% of the bills. As a result of Farrow and Grothman’s proposal, the recovery for medical bills will likely be:
  1. Victim #1 $100,000 (the uninsured guy)
  2. Victim #2 $80,000 (Employee with employer-sponsored health insurance)
  3. Victim #3 $60,000 (Senior citizen with Medicare)
  4. Victim #4 $40,000 (Poor person with Medicaid)
Now remember, the amount of the bills for all four people was the same $100,000. They all suffered the same injury in the same accident, but because of Farrow and Grothman’s proposed law, the bad guy causing the accident gets the benefit of the fact that Victim #2 was an employee with employer-sponsored health insurance, Victim #3 was a senior citizen on Medicare, and Victim #4 was a poor person on Medicaid. The other beneficiary of the proposed law would be Victim #1, the uninsured.

Under the current law, the red-light-running driver must pay the reasonable value of the injuries he caused, $400,000. Under the new proposal, the driver running the red light-will likely only pay, $280,000.

Under Wisconsin law today, the bad guy causing the accident does not get the benefit. The bad guy is simply responsible for the amount of the bills, assuming it is reasonable, and the only person who benefits is the person responsible enough to have insurance, the collateral source. Wisconsin law today says, rightfully, that bad guys do not get to benefit from good guys having insurance. The law today says that if anyone in this situation should benefit, it is the one who did not cause the accident. Surely, the one who caused the accident should not benefit.

Sadly, however, politics makes strange law, but I hope that’s not the case here. I believe in better. You deserve better. Sen. Grothman and Sen. Farrow should not support this law.

Email Sen. Paul Farrow at Sen.Farrow@legis.wisconsin.gov and Sen. Glenn Grothman at Sen.Grothman@legis.wisconsin.gov and tell them why they should not support this law. Tell Sen. Grothman and Sen. Farrow that this attempt to change Wisconsin’s 100-year-old law is unfair to Wisconsin citizens who are responsible enough to get health insurance.

The original version of this article is at Stand Up for Your Rights Wisconsin

Wisconsin Personal Injury Lawyer

24.3.10

Insurance Settlement Scam on Attorneys

Having read various emails directed to me and on lawyers listservs, I thought I'd link to this lawyers settlement scam story. Below are tips from secretservice.gov:

How do I report a case of advance fee fraud (also known as "4-1-9 fraud")?

The perpetrators of advance fee fraud, known internationally as "4-1-9 fraud" (after the section of the Nigerian penal code which addresses these schemes), are often very creative and innovative. A large number of victims are enticed into believing they have been singled out from the masses to share in multi-million dollar windfall profits for no apparent reason.

If you have suffered a significant financial loss related to advance fee fraud, please contact your local Secret Service field office. Telephone numbers are available in the Field Office Directory on this website or may also be found on the inside cover of your local telephone directory. Any investigation regarding this type of fraud will be conducted on a case by case basis at the discretion of the local Secret Service and U.S. Attorney's Office.

If you ever receive an e-mail or fax from someone you do not know requesting your assistance in a financial transaction, such as the transfer of a large sum of money into an account, or claiming you are the next of kin to an wealthy person who has died, or the winner of some obscure lottery, DO NOT respond. These requests are typically sent through public servers via a generic "spammed" e-mail message. Usually, the sender does not yet know your personal e-mail address and is depending on you to respond. Once you reply, whether you intend to string them along or tell them you are not interested, they will often continue to e-mail you in an attempt to harass or intimidate you. If you receive an unsolicited e-mail of this nature, the best course is to simply delete the message.

Due to a number of aggravating circumstances, such as the use of false names, addresses, stolen/cloned/prepaid cell phones and remote email addresses, verifying the location of and subsequent prosecution of these persons or groups is difficult. The act of sending an email soliciting strangers' assistance in a financial transaction is not, in itself, a crime. The installation of a credible spam filter and contacting your Internet Service Provider may help deter these unsolicited emails. However, there is currently no available program to completely block these types of messages.

How can I protect myself against check fraud?

-Don't give your checking account number to people you don't know, even if they claim they are from your bank.
-Reveal checking account information only to businesses you know to be reputable.
-Report lost or stolen checks immediately.
-Properly store or dispose of canceled checks and guard new checks.
-Report any inquiries or suspicious behavior to your bank, who will take measures to protect your account and notify proper authorities.
-Do not leave your automated teller machine receipt at the ATM; it may contain account information.
-Check your bank statements carefully and often.
-Use direct deposit.

Wisconsin Personal Injury Lawyer

8.5.09

Help Increase Auto Insurance Liability Limits in Wisconsin

With the legal minimum insurance in Wisconsin at $25,000, you could easily be seriously injured in a car accident through no fault of your own and later find out the other driver doesn't have enough car insurance to pay for your medical bills. Governor Doyle has proposed increasing the liability limits for auto insurance. Wisconsin has had the same minimum rates of liability coverage since 1982.

Higher limits are necessary and even automobile insurers admit that higher liability limits will make it easier for health insurers and healthcare providers to be paid. Please take time to send a short email to your State Representative and State Senator just by clicking here to read the message and send it.

Wisconsin Personal Injury Attorney

24.2.09

Corporate Employees Email Legislators

Wisconsin's insurance corporations are so afraid of losing profits over Governor Doyle's Car Insurance Proposal that the companies are attempting to make employees email and phone all members of the Wisconsin State Assembly and Wisconsin State Senate.

If you want to get fair car insurance coverage, then call the Legislative Hotline at (608) 266-9960 or (800) 362-9472 and tell your State Representative and State Senator to make sure that the TRUTH IN AUTO INSURANCE PROVISIONS are included in the budget.

I haven't done any new research but I blogged about American Family's $564,400,000.00 (Five-Hundred-Sixty-Four-Million-Four-Hundred-Thousand-Dollars) profits and AIG's Greenberg's $4,400,000,000.00 (Four-Billion-Four-Hundred-Million-Dollars).

Wisconsin Personal Injury Lawyer

23.2.09

Governor Doyle's Car Insurance Proposal

In 1995, insurance companies in the Wisconsin Insurance Alliance conned state legislators and the governor into believing that if they changed the law Wisconsin citizens would pay less in car insurance rates. Well, the bill became law and car insurance rates never went up. Oh, does that sound to good to be true? Exactly. What really happened was that Wisconsin citizens LOST many rights they had under their insurance policies and of course, car insurance rates WENT UP.

Here are WIA's members:

A I G
Allied Insurance
Allstate Insurance
American Family Insurance
Ameriprise Auto & Home Ins
Auto Club Insurance Assn
Badger Mutual Insurance
Capitol Indemnity Corp
C N A
Church Mutual Insurance
CUNA Mutual Insurance Group
Farmers Insurance
1st Auto & Casualty Insurance Co
General Reinsurance Corp Kemper Auto & Home
Germantown Mutual Insurance
Homestead Mutual Insurance Co
Integrity Mutual Insurance
Ixonia Mutual Insurance Co
Jewelers Mutual Insurance
League of Wisc Municipalities Mutual
Liberty Mutual Group
Manitowoc Mutual Insurance
Maple Valley Mutual Insurance
McMillan/Warner Mutual Ins
Mount Morris Mutual
Nationwide Indemnity
Old Republic Surety Co
Partners Mutual Insurance Co
ProAssurance Progressive Northern Insurance Cos
QBE Regional/General Casualty
Racine County Mutual Insurance Co
Rural Mutual Insurance Co
SECURA Insurance
Sentry Insurance
S F M
Sheboygan Falls Insurance
Society Insurance
State Auto Insurance Cos
State Farm Insurance
Sugar Creek Mutual Insurance Co
Travelers
United Wisconsin Insurance Co
Waukesha Cty Mutual Insurance
WEA Property & Casualty Co
West Bend Mutual Insurance
Western National Mutual Ins Co
Wilson Mutual Insurance
Wisconsin American Mutual Insurance Co
Wisconsin Assn of Mutual Insurance Cos
Wisconsin County Mutual Insurance Co
Wisconsin Mutual Insurance Co
Wisconsin Reinsurance Corp


Recall Insurance Company Tricks and my recent Car Insurance post.

The Governor's bill, which is in the budget, reverses the insurance companies' 1995 nonsense giving back Wisconsin citizens the rights that were taken away and raises car insurance limits from the 25-year-old $25,000 minimum to $100,000. Who's looking out for you? It's not Wisconsin’s property and casualty insurers. Here, it is absolutely Governor Doyle!

Contact your legislator and let him or her know that you SUPPORT Governor Doyle's Truth in Auto Insurance Law.

Wisconsin Personal Injury Attorney

20.2.09

Preemption Garbage Strikes Wisconsin

Blunt v. Medtronic, 2009 WI 16, is another bad example of how the U.S. Supreme Court has screwed up products liability law for consumers. Blunt is likely consistent with the litany of horrific decisions from federal courts, but the result is simply unfair to consumers. Bottom line, the Wisconsin Supreme Court held that this personal injury case was preempted because the FDA approved a defective product that Medtronic effectively recalled. Yeah, that's great, let's assume that the FDA always gets it right and bar consumers from suing for injuries received from an "approved" product even after the manufacturer has essentially admitted the product was bad.

Wisconsin Personal Injury Lawyer

12.2.09

Wisconsin Car Accident Deaths Down

According to this report from the Governors Highway Safety Association, Wisconsin car accident deaths were down 20% in 2008 from the year prior. This article from the Wall Street Journal explains that nationally car accident deathss were down about 10% in 2008. Interestingly, the WSJ article sets forth various speculative reasons for the decrease, including the fact that the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety uses "the power of shame to push car makers to beef up their designs for crash-worthiness." What about the power of product liability lawsuits holding car manufacturers responsible for failing to incorporate reasonable crashworthy designs? Not that I'd expect the WSJ to ever give personal injury lawyers any credit for positive change.

Wisconsin Personal Injury Lawyer

11.2.09

Dangerous Car Accident Vehicles

Forbes caught my attention today with Most Dangerous Vehicles Of 2009. The vehicles listed were the Chevy Aveo, Chevy Colorado, Chevy Trailblazer, Chrysler PT Cruiser, Dodge Nitro, Ford Ranger, GMC Canyon, GMC Envoy, Hummer H3, Hyundai Accent, Jeep Liberty, Jeep Wrangler, Kia Rio, Mazda B Series, Nissan Frontier, and Suzuki Equator.

Wisconsin Car Accident Lawyer

28.1.09

Wisconsin Cheerleading Lawsuit

Wisconsin's Supreme Court issued Noffke v. Bakke yesterday and it's been discussed in the news, Wall Street Journal's Blog, and by legal professors, Legal Profession Blog and Sports Law Blog. The Blogosphere discussion seems to focus on cheerleading as a contact sport, which I'm sure law scholars can debate ad infinitum.

Simple lawyers like me though wonder, why didn't a jury get to decide whether this fellow cheerleader and school district acted reasonably? I ask that rhetorically because I know the reason is because a prior Wisconsin legislature and governor decided to give IMMUNITY.

Noffke v. Bakke shows two types of immunity statutes in Wisconsin - governmental immunity (school districts, cities, villages, etc.) and recreational immunity (certain sports, activities, etc.). In my opinion, immunity laws are a horrible form of tort reform, which occurs too often in Wisconsin personal injury law.

Wisconsin Personal Injury Lawyer

22.1.09

True Justice from the new Dept of Justice?

In a prior post, I explained how federal agencies can and have been used to strip Americans of legal rights. In Revival of Justice: What Obama's DoJ appointees should do first, Yale Law School's Judith Resnik sets forth some ideas for the new administration to revive true justice.

The highlights from my perspective are:
  • Acknowledge that the courts are for all citizens;
  • Stop government lawyers from cutting off access to courts for civil litigants;
  • Don't use support "tort reform" laws ("reform" is really short for deform);
  • Give consumers, employees and tort victims more access to court;
  • Stop mandatory arbitration (see e.g. your credit card contract);
  • Let consumers with tiny claims aggregate in classes so they can get lawyers; and
  • Eliminate immunities for government officials and private contractors.

Wisconsin Personal Injury Attorney

    15.1.09

    Ingenix Lawsuit Settled

    UnitedHealth Care through an outfit called Ingenix allegedly engaged in some insurance company behaviors I've mentioned. So it settled the lawsuit relating to that paying $350,000,000.00 to resolve class action lawsuits and $50,000,000.00 to the NY AG.

    I found one interesting aspect of such lawsuits to be the hypocrisy of doctors bringing the cases since they are typically the ones seeking to limit your rights in medical malpractice litigation.

    Wisconsin Personal Injury Lawyer

    2.12.08

    Dangerous Toys

    U.S. PIRG is a federation of state Public Interest Research Groups that stands up for our health and well-being addressing issues involving product safety, prescription drugs and other consumer issues. It recently published two papers that are quite informational for those shopping for toys during Christmas: Toy Shopping Guide and Trouble In Toyland: The 23rd Annual Survey of Toy Safety. The basic theme is "buyer beware" as dangerous toys are still sold in stores across the country. Toys sent more than 80,000 children under 5 to emergency rooms in 2007 for serious injuries causing 18 deaths.

    Wisconsin Personal Injury Attorney

    12.11.08

    Insurance Company Tricks

    I've blogged on insurance companies discussing their ways, but a new report from the American Association for Justice formalizes and confirms some of what I've said. Check out Tricks of the Trade.

    Here's the executive summary (minus the footnotes) of behaviors:

    "The U.S. insurance industry has trillions of dollars in assets, enjoys average profits of over $30 billion a year, and pays its CEOs more than any other industry. But insurance companies still engage in dirty tricks and unethical behavior to boost their bottom line even further.

    The current economic turmoil affecting the insurance industry onWall Street has only made the outlook bleaker for consumers living on Main Street. Insurance companies are likely to demand huge rate hikes and
    refuse more claims than ever.


    Some of America’s most well-known insurance companies—the same ones that spend billions on
    advertising to earn your trust—have endeavored to deny claims, delay payments, confuse consumers with incomprehensible insurance-speak, and retroactively refuse anyone who may cost them money.


    This report describes some of the most egregious ways the insurance industry attempts to make money at the expense of consumers. These are some of the tricks of the trade:

    Denying Claims
    Some of the nation’s biggest insurance companies—Allstate, AIG, and State Farm among others—have denied valid claims in an attempt to boost their bottom lines. These companies have rewarded employees who successfully denied claims, replaced employees who
    would not, and when all else failed, engaged in outright fraud to avoid paying claims.


    Delaying Until Death
    Many insurance companies routinely delay claims, knowing full well that many policyholders will simply away in safes. Undoubtedly, the most shameful use of delay tactics has been by long-term care insurers, who often take advantage of their policyholders’ age and ill health. In the words of one regulator, "the bottom line is that insurance companies make money when they don’t pay claims…They’ll do anything to avoid paying, because if they wait long enough, they know the policyholders will die."


    Confusing Consumers
    Insurance contracts are some of the most dense and incomprehensible contracts a consumer is ever likely to see. More than half of all states have enacted "plain English" laws for consumer contracts, yet many Americans still do not fully understand the risks they are subject to. After Hurricane Katrina, insurance companies used obscure "anti-concurrent" clauses to get out of paying claims. Consumers who purchased hurricane insurance and thought they were covered suddenly found the coverage eliminated by an obscure clause they could not hope to understand.


    Discriminating by Credit Score
    Increasingly, insurance companies are using credit reports to dictate the premiums consumers pay, or whether they can even get insurance in the first place. The practice penalizes the poor, senior citizens with little credit, and those who have suffered financial crisis through no fault of their own. Insurance companies have denied fiscally responsible people who paid their bills in cash, but refused renewals because of a lack of credit history. Others have seen auto rate hikes near 600 percent despite clean driving records after falling on economic troubles.


    Abandoning the Sick
    Health insurers looking to cut costs have taken to canceling retroactively, or rescinding, the policies of people whose conditions have become expensive to treat. Some insurance companies have even offered bonuses to employees who meet "cancellation goals." Rescission targets patients in the midst of treatment when they are at their most vulnerable—even cancer patients in the midst of chemotherapy have been targeted.


    Canceling for a Call
    Many people are rightly reluctant to make small claims on their home insurance for fear their insurance company will raise their premiums. But few realize that insurance companies often refuse to renew a policy because the policyholder did as little as inquire about the possibility of making a claim. Many times an insurance company will count an inquiry over the phone
    as the same as a claim, and then they will do everything in their power to drop the policyholder."


    Wisconsin Personal Injury Attorney

    13.8.08

    Accident insurers put on the boxing gloves


    I saw this from the American Association for Justice and it says what you need to know about Allstate and car accident insurers listed as the worst insurers, like Farmers, Liberty Mutual and State Farm. I might add Progressive, American Family and Sentry Insurance. Car accident insurance companies really want:

    ~ Premiums not claims
    ~ To deter valid lawsuits
    ~ The public to think lawsuits are bogus
    ~ You to feel guilty for making legitimate claims
    ~ You to say "I'm not the kind of person who files a lawsuit"
    ~ Jurors to think plaintiffs are dishonest
    ~ Your rights minimized and theirs preserved
    ~ Verdicts for damages to be less than fair
    ~ Caps on damages
    ~ And judges who won't hold them accountable.

    30.11.07

    Holiday Shopping Online

    Below are some tips for smart Christmas shopping on the Internet, but let me begin by stating: if it sounds too good to be true, it is. Now the tips:
    1. Check out the seller.
    2. Read the site’s privacy policy.
    3. Read return policies carefully.
    4. Know what you’re getting. Read the product description closely.
    5. Don’t fall for a false email or pop-up. Legitimate companies don’t send unsolicited email messages asking for your password or login name, or your financial information.
    6. Look for signs a site is safe. When you’re asked to provide payment information, the beginning of the website’s URL address should change from http to shttp or https, indicating that the purchase is encrypted or secured.
    7. Secure your computer. At a minimum, your computer should have anti-virus and anti-spyware software, and a firewall.
    8. Consider how you’ll pay. Credit cards generally are a safe option.
    9. Keep a paper trail.
    10. Turn your computer off when you’re finished shopping.

    Wisconsin Personal Injury Lawyer